Minimum raises and reopening action

A short all-in lands between two full raises, and someone asks whether the betting is open again. Start with the player whose turn it is. That player may be allowed to raise while someone else at the same table can only call or fold. The current wager alone cannot settle the question.

This lesson separates raising permission, the minimum full raise and stack capacity. Its worked hands use no-limit betting under the Poker TDA 2026 tournament rule profile. The same reopening principle applies to pot-limit under that profile, with an additional pot-sized maximum. Confirm the procedure used by your event before applying these examples.

Ace: “Is the betting open for everyone?” Victoria: “Check each player. The same 350 wager can give them different options.”

Read the amount as a total

On the flop, Alex bets 100 and Blair raises to 300. Blair has increased the wager by 200: subtract the old 100 from the new 300. The next full raise must add at least that 200, so its minimum total is 500. Doubling the current 300 would produce 600, which is larger than the minimum.

The words “to” and “by” distinguish two amounts. A raise to 300 makes your total contribution on this betting round 300. A raise by 200 adds 200 to the current wager. In this example they describe the same action. Record totals first, then subtract consecutive totals to find the increases.

A full opening bet also establishes the first minimum increase. If Alex opens for 100, the smallest full raise is to 200. If Blair instead raises to 300, the new minimum increase becomes 200. A later full raise to 700 increases 300 by 400, making the next minimum total 1,100.

These are amounts for the current betting round. Chips already in the pot from earlier streets do not become part of a player’s current wager. On the turn, a new opening bet starts a new sequence. Keep street contributions separate from the size of the pot, even when both happen to show the same number.

Use the same subtraction with awkward chip amounts. An opening bet of 50 followed by a raise to 125 creates a 75 increase. The next minimum total is 200. There is no need to round that to 250 merely because doubling is easier to remember; the chip denominations and applicable minimum opening bet still matter.

Keep the last full increase after a short all-in

Return to Alex’s 100 bet and Blair’s raise to 300. Casey now moves all-in for a total of 350. Casey adds only 50 to the wager, short of the established 200 increase. The current wager becomes 350, but the minimum full-raise increase remains 200.

For a player who is entitled to raise and has enough chips, the next full raise is therefore to 550: current wager 350 plus last full increase 200. A raise to 400 would add just 50. A raise to 700 would add 350 and could be a legal no-limit size, but it is not the minimum.

An all-in can also be a full raise. If Casey moves all-in to 500 after Blair’s 300, the increase is 200 and qualifies in full. The next minimum total becomes 700. If Casey instead goes all-in to 600, the increase is 300 and the next minimum total becomes 900.

Compare two histories that end at 350. In the first, Alex bets 100, Blair raises to 300 and Casey goes all-in to 350: the minimum full increase stays 200. In the second, Alex bets 100, Blair raises to 200 and Casey raises to 350: Casey’s 150 increase is full, so the next minimum total is 500.

Ask whose action is reopening

Under this TDA profile, a player who has already acted needs to face at least a full bet or raise when action returns before raising rights reopen. For the ordinary completed-opening examples here, compare the extra amount that player faces with the last full increase. Use the player’s own previous contribution.

After Alex bets 100, Blair raises to 300 and Casey goes all-in to 350, Alex faces 250 more: 350 minus 100. The last full increase is 200. Alex therefore has raising rights. Blair’s earlier full raise has already supplied enough additional action; Casey’s small increase does not remove that right.

Suppose Alex calls the 350. When action returns to Blair, Blair has 300 committed and faces only 50 more. That is less than the 200 full increase. Blair can call the extra 50 or fold, but cannot raise. Having a large stack behind does not change this result.

Now change Alex’s response. Instead of calling, Alex raises to 550, a full increase of 200 over Casey’s 350. Blair now faces 250 more than Blair’s previous 300, so Blair’s rights reopen. With the wager at 550 and the full increase still 200, Blair’s next full raise would be to at least 750.

Add up several short all-ins

Several short all-ins can together put a full increase in front of a player who acted earlier. Alex bets 100, Blair goes all-in for 150 and Casey goes all-in for 200. Dana, a fourth live player, calls 200 and still has chips behind. Each all-in adds only 50. Alex now faces 100 more than the original 100 bet, which meets the full increase of 100.

With Dana able to respond, Alex’s raising rights reopen under this profile. Neither short all-in replaces the last full increase, so the next minimum full raise is to 300: current wager 200 plus the established 100. Do not add the two short increases again on top of that minimum. If Blair and Casey are Alex’s only opponents, Alex can only call or fold because both opponents are all-in.

Add Dana between the two all-ins: Alex bets 100, Blair goes all-in to 150, Dana calls 150 with chips behind, then Casey goes all-in to 200. Alex faces the cumulative 100 and may raise. If Alex only calls 200, Dana faces 50 beyond the 150 already called and cannot raise.

Dana’s intervening call matters because Dana acted at a different wager. A total measured from Alex’s 100 is not also the total measured from Dana’s 150. Write a separate previous contribution beside each player; otherwise a correct table-wide sum can produce the wrong ruling for an individual.

Ace: “Both players face 200. Can both raise?” Victoria: “Alex faces 100 more, but Dana faces only 50. Compare each player with their own earlier action.”

Keep the first opportunity to act separate

A player who has not yet acted still has an initial opportunity to raise. Suppose Alex bets 100, Blair raises to 300 and Casey goes all-in to 350 before Dana’s first turn on this street. Dana can make a full raise to at least 550 if Dana has the chips. Nothing needs to reopen for Dana.

That permission does not make any chosen size a full raise. If Dana announces a raise to 400 with plenty of chips behind, the proposed 50 increase falls short. A player with open rights must still meet the full minimum unless a permitted all-in uses that player’s entire remaining stack.

The practice exercise begins after a valid full opening wager. It does not judge a player who checked before an incomplete opening all-in, a short blind, action out of turn or a disputed declaration. Those situations need more history than its fields contain. Reconstruct the hand with the dealer or tournament staff. The opponent control separates reopened action from the ability to make a raise that someone can answer.

For an unacted player in the exercise, choose No for already acted and enter zero as the previous contribution. That convention fits the supported postflop snapshot. An unacted player may already have chips committed in other situations, such as a posted blind.

Check what the stack can cover

Once permission is settled, compare the player’s maximum possible total on this street with the current wager and full minimum. At a current wager of 350 and a full minimum of 550, a player with open rights may still be unable to make a full raise.

The maximum total includes chips already committed on this street. If Alex has put in 100 and has 400 behind, Alex can reach a total of 500. Enter 500 in the exercise. Entering the 400 behind would understate the total by 100 and could produce the wrong capacity result.

At a maximum total of 500, Alex can move all-in for less than the full minimum. That increases the wager by 150, so it remains a short raise. Alex cannot choose a non-all-in raise to 450 while keeping 50 behind. Being short of the full minimum permits the all-in exception, not a range of smaller elective raises.

At a maximum total of 320, Alex cannot match the full 350. Committing the remaining 220 makes a short all-in call. It does not reduce what other players must call, and it does not entitle Alex to win every chip others later put in. Side-pot accounting is a separate step.

Recheck Blair from the earlier hand: 300 committed, current wager 350 and rights closed after Alex calls. Even if Blair could reach 800, Blair cannot raise all-in to that amount. Blair can add 50 to call or fold. Stack size answers how much is available; prior action determines whether increasing the wager is allowed.

For pot-limit, this stack comparison still needs the legal pot maximum. A stack of 800 does not automatically make 800 a permitted total. Work through the pot-limit maximum raise lesson to add that ceiling after establishing raising rights and the full minimum.

Work through the boundary desk

Use the practice desk below between sessions. Choose the rule profile, enter the current wager and last full increase, then identify whether the player has acted. Add that player’s previous contribution and maximum possible street total. The exercise accepts whole chip units and treats the action history you supply as already established.

Start with the example: current wager 350, last full increase 200, already acted Yes, previous contribution 300 and maximum total 800. The player faces 50 more. Under the named TDA profile, raising rights are closed. A displayed full-size reference of 550 explains the arithmetic; it is not an available raise for this player.

Change only the previous contribution to 100. The extra amount faced becomes 250, so rights open and a full raise is affordable. Then lower the maximum total to 500. Rights stay open, but capacity changes to a short all-in raise. Lower it again to 350 and the stack covers exactly a call.

Try the cumulative example by entering current wager 200, last full increase 100, already acted Yes, previous contribution 100 and maximum total 600. Rights open at that exact boundary. Change the current wager to 199 and the player faces only 99. The permission changes even though the calculated full minimum moves by just one chip.

The unknown or other procedure setting withholds a reopening verdict. It still shows subtraction and the next full-size reference, but those numbers cannot identify a house rule. Obtain the applicable procedure before choosing a profile.

Changing an input clears the previous result so a receipt cannot silently describe an earlier hand. Submit the revised values to calculate again. Reset example restores the starting snapshot. If a field is rejected, correct it before treating any result as a ruling.

A valid set of numbers can still describe an impossible or incomplete history. The desk cannot detect an omitted full raise, a misheard declaration or a chip that the dealer ruled a call. Its receipt is a check of the facts entered. It does not reconstruct the action or recommend whether calling, folding or raising is profitable.

Separate the 50% correction rule from reopening

The 50% threshold often gets borrowed from a different rule. Under the TDA no-limit and pot-limit profile, a non-all-in underraise of at least half the required increase must be completed to a full raise. That procedure for correcting an action does not mean every half-size all-in reopens an earlier player’s raising rights.

For example, Alex bets 100. Blair, with chips remaining and no qualifying all-in, makes an underraise to 150. The increase is 50, half the required 100. Under the stated correction rule, Blair must complete the raise to 200. Use the corrected 200 action when recording the hand.

Now give Blair only 150 in total. Blair goes all-in to 150 after Alex’s 100. The 50 increase remains a short all-in instead of being completed to 200. If everyone else folds or only calls 150, Alex faces 50 more and cannot raise again under this profile.

The distinction depends on the actual action and the player’s chips. Declarations and chip handling may also determine whether an apparent underraise was a call or a raise. A single oversized chip placed while facing a bet is treated as a call under the TDA rule unless a raise was declared first. The worksheet cannot see those facts.

Limit poker has a different reopening threshold in the TDA rules. Do not transfer this page’s no-limit and pot-limit answer to a limit game, and do not switch to a 50% reopening test halfway through these examples. Establish the betting structure and the adopted rules before calculating.

If the dealer is still deciding what a wager means, wait for that decision before entering it. Recording an uncorrected 150 as a settled full raise, then calculating perfectly from it, still gives the wrong result. Resolve the action first and calculate from the amount that stands.

Keep a short record of the action

A usable record names the street and lists each action in order: Alex bets 100; Blair raises to 300; Casey is all-in to 350; Alex calls 350; action returns to Blair. Add the last full increase, Blair’s previous contribution and Blair’s maximum street total. That is enough to explain this supported case without guessing.

State the result in the same order every time. Blair faces 50 more, below the required 200, so raising rights are closed. The next full-size reference would be 550 for a player who may raise. Separating those statements prevents a correct minimum calculation from sounding like permission.

Ace: “I have permission. Do I have enough chips?” Victoria: “Check your maximum street total against the full minimum. A smaller all-in can still be a short raise.”

At a live table, ask neutral factual questions such as “What is the current wager?” or “What was the previous raise total?” Casual use of betting declarations can have consequences under the event rules. Let the dealer clarify the action instead of announcing a raise merely to ask whether one is possible.

Keep this exercise for study and hand review, and follow the event’s restrictions on electronic assistance during play. When a real hand falls outside the supported examples, the dealer or floor needs the complete history. A calculation is useful evidence only when its inputs match the action that actually occurred.

For more worked poker lessons, return to Info & Tools. Save the wager totals in order when reviewing a hand, and identify the player whose turn comes next.

↑ Back to top